@jarausch: "Dir Sir.
I'd like to suggest you put all your results onto a private web page
or wiki and post a pointer to your web page only once a month
on comp.soft-sys.math.maple and sci.math.symbolic
Perhaps it's only me, but I feel annoyed by your flood of postings
to these news groups.
Helmut Jarausch
Lehrstuhl fuer Numerische Mathematik
RWTH - Aachen University
D 52056 Aachen, Germany"
    @vb: "<url>
I appreciate the reports in this newsgroup from the GEMM project for
two
reasons:
1. I feel I am gaining an insight into the relative quality and
strengths of
the various CASs on the market.
2. You say that Vladimir should 'improve various CASs by reporting
bugs',
but not publicly. The GEMM project shows to me that one company in
particular does not fix their bugs when they are reported publicly or
otherwise. Without the work of Vladimir Bondarenko I would be
blissfully
unaware of the lack of regression testing with this CAS. I almost
bought it
at one stage.
I remember going to a presentation by the team leader for FORTRAN
compiler
development at Digital Equipment Corporation. I was particularly
impressed
with their regression testing. He said that every new release of the
compiler, without exception, had to correctly compile every piece of
code
that had produced a problem in any release since version 1.0
I recall an anecdote in which the speaker said a neighbour of his was
not a
professional programmer, but he had produced some spaghetti FORTRAN
to
maintain the results ladder for his ten pin bowling team. The code
didn't
work because a weird construct in the user's program actually
exercised a
bug in the compiler. The bug was fixed and even that piece of code for
the
bowling club was included in the regression testing for all further
releases
of the compiler.
I don't want to go on for too long here, but I would like to round out
the
story. At that conference the very next speaker was the woman in
charge of
development of sofware for the flight controls of the new (at that
time)
Boeing 737. It was written using the FORTRAN compiler from Digital
Equipment
Corporation. She said that it was chosen because of the extensive
regression
testing of the compiler and its acknowledged reputation for quality in
the
industry which was verified by their own testing. That gave me a warm
and
fuzzy feeling when I flew in the first commercial flights of the 737.
The postings of Vladimir Bondarenko, in this newsgroup, clearly
demonstrate
to me the degree to which various CAS producers have that same
committment
to quality. If the same bugs exist through numerous software releases,
I
think that is valuable public information. It just should not happen.
Cheers,
Brad
On Jun 21, 2:33 am, Helmut Jarausch <email_address>
wrote:
<quote>"
    @vb: "Fred writes:
<url>
I find Valdimir posts the most interesting and educational posts.
By sharing with us his findings, we get to learn more.
If you do not find them interesting for you, then no one
is forcing you to read them.
Fred
<quote>"
    @fateman: "Note that VB re-posted that message from Brad (Cooper) dated from
February, 2005.  This does not mean that Mr. Cooper feels that VB's
current activities are defensible.
RJF"
    @vb: "IR>  Bondarenko has been a permanent denizen
IR>  of my kill file for quite a while now.
Could I indulge myself in a self-quotation?
Do you expect me to get feeling excited or disappointed?
If you would have told me that the melting point of potassium
is about 63.65 degrees Centigrade at the normal pressure, would
you have expected from me a splash of joy, or a wild bout of
the total, utmost disappointment?
You might think, along with some other posters, that I am
looking for some response from my readers. Yes, I am happy
with a response. Also, if a reader selects to keep silence,
it's great, too. But the main goal of our posting is different
from getting of any kind of response.
VB>  Hello, all Maplesoft's actual and potential customers
VB>  over the world,
I am a Maplesoft's customer, and I am shocked with a way this
company pays to quality. In fact, it looks like, for an external
observer, that the Maplesoft's programmers run, to and fro, over
the Maple kernel and hack it with big sharp broadaxes...
And because of this, I have wasted LOTS of my precious time.
Trying to bypass the Maple bugs when possible etc... I've
contacted Maplesoft repeatedly, all in vain!
Please kindly ignore our messages. Or please kindly take them
into account. Or please kindly keep reading some of them while
ignoring the rest. Or a linear combination of the above-said...
or... There are a zillion of choices there ;)
You do not like chemistry? It would be quite funny had everyone
would like chemical facts.
I keep writing about the melting point of the potassium. The
melting point is an invariant w.r.t. my or your desire to know
or do not know about it.
It's not a religion. It's a science of quality assurance. Like
strength of materials or quantum chromodynamics.
Best of luck to you,
Vladimir Bondarenko
<quote>"
    @vb: "Dimitris writes to Richard J. Fateman on Fri, 15 Jun 2007 07:20:01:
<url>
I completely disagree with your opinion about Vladimir's posts.
In my point of view VB trying to perform a very serious task:
Making CASs more friendly for the user.
I am with him in this issue.
<quote>"
    @vb: "<url>
Newsgroups: comp.soft-sys.math.maple
From: Peter Luschny <email_address>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 10:57:19 +0200
Local: Tues, Jul 11 2006 1:57 am
Subject: Re: solve oddity
A reason why I would not like to upgrade can be seen in
the bug-lists of Vladimir: They show that it is not reasonable
to expect the number of severe bugs (bugs in the mathematical
core of Maple) will drop - quite the contrary.
Peter"
    @vb: "Brad Cooper writes:
<url>
I find it wonderful that Vladimir is persuing excellence in
CAS for the user community. I find it shocking that there
appears to be so little regression testing of Maple.
Alternatively, if there is regression testing, then it is just
as shocking that it is so ineffective.
When, a few weeks ago, Vladimir toasted the birth of the first
reported bug in Maple 15 years ago and then showed that it is
STILL THERE I was shocked.
How can that be?
I use a CAS almost daily in my work and it is a fabulous tool.
With Vladimir beavering away at the task of CAS testing, these
systems will ultimately be better and we all benefit.
Vladimir, I salute you.
Cheers,
Brad"
    @fateman: "<quote>
Please retain the date of the posting that you are repeating; in this
case December, 2004.
Or better, don't repeat a posting."
    @dougkeenan: "VB, finding bugs and reporting them is fine.  I do the same.  The
issue here is your manner of approach.  Many people find that manner
off-putting.  I tried following this group, but decided to largely
give up, in substantial part because of your approach.
I now largely stick to MaplePrimes.  If you look there, you will see
that I have both positive and negative comments about Maple.  The
underlying theme of my comments, though, is different from yours.
Simply, I believe that the mathematical world is better with Maple in
it.  (Could anyone really disagree with that?)
Can Maple be made better?  Of course.  So, take a positive attitude,
and work towards that."
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 9, "forum_name": "sci.math.symbolic.20140819.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-sci.math.parquet'}